Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Brenton State Bank of Jefferson v. Tiffany

Supreme Court of Iowa

Decided May 17, 1989No. 87-1323Published

1ConcurrenceNeuman, Justice

I concur in division II of the majority opinion but must depart from division I and what I believe to be my colleagues’ misinterpretation of the operation and effect of the in rem default judgment obtained by Brenton Bank.

The majority relies on cases and authority establishing that an in rem judgment “is not sufficient to extinguish the entire indebtedness.” Strand v. Halverson, 220 Iowa 1276, 1277, 264 N.W.266, 267 (1935) (quoting 34 C.J.S. Judgments § 1183, at 768 (1924)); see also Riverview State Bank v. Dreyer, 188 Kan. 270, 273, 362 P.2d 55, 57-58 (1961); Epperson v. Halliburton Co., 434…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Epperson v. Halliburton CompanySupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1967
  2. Strand v. HalversonSupreme Court of Iowa · 1935
  3. Riverview State Bank v. DreyerSupreme Court of Kansas · 1961

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API